March 10, 2007

The Right to Bear Arms

Comments

Legally, it is not an important ruling: it is not a precedent outside of DC and disagrees with various other appeals court rulings (I speculate: I don't follow these cases, nor am I a lawyer.)

As far as libertarians and the NRA are concerned, it is only a small success because it doesn't allow absolute prohibition, but does allow mandatory registration and prohibitions against carrying.

"Yesterday's ruling guts key parts of the law but does not address provisions that effectively bar private citizens from carrying guns outside the home."

"Yesterday's majority opinion said that the District has a right to regulate and require the registration of firearms but not to ban them in homes."

But I'm not surprised to see all the propagandists pretending this is major: it's simply better than they've been able to do recently.

CATO flack Tom Palmer (who's very intelligent and erudite for an ideologue) stoops to a sneering comparison. People like that should try being declared outlaw, ie. no protection from the law. Let them defend themselves however they want, with no legal recrimination for anyone who wants to attack them or destroy or steal their property. See how long they last.

Regarding a recent article published on cnn.com the draconian laws in effect should be repealed. My question, which seems to have no answer, is how to push to ensure that our children can live in society that doesn't allude to having a free society but in the same right, restricts a persons choice. This policy creates a black market of violence and trafficking where no one in the U.S. benefits.